DXOMark has completed their review of the Sigma 18-200 f/3.5-6.3 DC Macro OS HSM lens for Canon. They’ve compared it to other superzooms from Canon itself as well as Tamron and found the Sigma to be the best performer. On top of it being the leader in its class, this new lens actually costs less than the lens it replaced.

From DXOMark:

“Sigma’s cosmetic revamp of the exterior and revision of the optical construction has resulted in a lens that not only looks classy but also produces results superior to rivals including those from Canon.

A reduction in weight and size, albeit only slight makes this all the more tempting for travel, while the enhancement in sharpness and optical performance generally at the longer focal lengths is particularly valued in zoom like this. Although this has led to a certain amount of compromise with the performance at the wide-end, retaining the modest price of its predecessor the Sigma easily impresses.”

It's becoming harder to convince my friends that buying only Canon gear is the right thing to do.

Sigma have put out some amazing lenses in the last two years and Canon's only memorable release is the Canon EF 24-70mm F/2.8 L II.

I guess "memorable" is subjective, but over the past couple of years Canon has released, in addition to the lens you mentioned, the 24-70 f4, 24IS, 28IS, 35IS, 40mm pancake, and 200-400L, all of which are first rate regardless of whether one may actually want any of them.

Although perhaps not technically super-zooms, Canon's best APS-C travel zooms right now are the EF-S 18-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS STM Lens and the Canon EF-S 15-85mm f/3.5-5.6 USM IS (IMHO), and they are not included in the comparison. Both are vastly superior to the Canon 18-200, and probably vastly superior to the Sigma as well.

It's becoming harder to convince my friends that buying only Canon gear is the right thing to do.

Sigma have put out some amazing lenses in the last two years and Canon's only memorable release is the Canon EF 24-70mm F/2.8 L II.

I guess "memorable" is subjective, but over the past couple of years Canon has released, in addition to the lens you mentioned, the 24-70 f4, 24IS, 28IS, 35IS, 40mm pancake, and 200-400L, all of which are first rate regardless of whether one may actually want any of them.

Don't forget the 17 and 24mm Ts-e lenses, which are optically great and very highly regarded. And the 70-200 F2.8 II was also a major upgrade over the previous version.

However, these are all (except the 40mm pancake) high end glass. What Sigma is bringing is good stuff at more moderate prices. Take advantage now...if they really catch on their pricing will catch up to Canon's.

Interesting ... don't forget that Tamron is coming up with 16-300mm lens for APS-C DSLRs ... but still, $399 is a bargain for this Sigma 18-200 OS and is worth the money and provides a good compromise for travel photography, when you can only carry just one lens but also want some good wide angle views and telephoto reach.

Ok, Sigma made the "Best" Superzoom of em all... but 9 MPixel Resolution @DXO? This lense isn't even able to serve a old Canon 60D or even a 50D? People who buy this kind of gear should head to the Sony RX1, they get a far better and smaller System @f2.8

Ok, Sigma made the "Best" Superzoom of em all... but 9 MPixel Resolution @DXO? This lense isn't even able to serve a old Canon 60D or even a 50D? People who buy this kind of gear should head to the Sony RX1, they get a far better and smaller System @f2.8

No offence.

Bro, it's all relative. That sharpness beats out its competitors. Were you expecting a score of 16 MPixels or something, which is the score the Canon 24-70 2.8L II got? That lens is $2300, this one is $400. You gotta be able to keep your expectations in check when you're buying a bargain lens. This ain't no L or Art glass homeboy. Additionally, most people who are buying such cheap lenses that cover such a wide range aren't going to be those who are super critical of maximal sharpness. If you are, then any smart person knows you need to step up to where the big boys play and get out that big boy checkbook to buy that razor sharp prime.

Congrats to Sigma, although I personally wish they could have stretched it to 250mm (for a 400mm equivalent). As most of you already know, many times it's not the equipment, but what you do with it. Case in point if I may ... the following representative shots were taken with Sigma's "old" 18-250 Macro OS and a humble T4i on a trip through Myanmar (Burma).

Congrats to Sigma, although I personally wish they could have stretched it to 250mm (for a 400mm equivalent). As most of you already know, many times it's not the equipment, but what you do with it. Case in point if I may ... the following representative shots were taken with Sigma's "old" 18-250 Macro OS and a humble T4i on a trip through Myanmar (Burma).

Those are beautiful images ... and I agree that a good craftsman can make compelling images with the available tools. Well done!

Ok, Sigma made the "Best" Superzoom of em all... but 9 MPixel Resolution @DXO? This lense isn't even able to serve a old Canon 60D or even a 50D? People who buy this kind of gear should head to the Sony RX1, they get a far better and smaller System @f2.8

No offence.

Bro, it's all relative. That sharpness beats out its competitors. Were you expecting a score of 16 MPixels or something, which is the score the Canon 24-70 2.8L II got? That lens is $2300, this one is $400. You gotta be able to keep your expectations in check when you're buying a bargain lens. This ain't no L or Art glass homeboy. Additionally, most people who are buying such cheap lenses that cover such a wide range aren't going to be those who are super critical of maximal sharpness. If you are, then any smart person knows you need to step up to where the big boys play and get out that big boy checkbook to buy that razor sharp prime.

I agree with the point you are making, but I would refrain from using the lines struck off above ... coz that kind of language comes across in a condescending way.Cheers